Ernesto Domínguez López and Helen Yaffe The deep, historical-roots of Cuban anti- imperialism Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Domínguez López, Ernesto and Yaffe, Helen (2017) The deep, historical-roots of Cuban anti- imperialism. Third World Quarterly, 38 (11). pp. 2517-2535. ISSN 0143-6597 DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2017.1374171 © 2017 Southseries Inc This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/84628/ Available in LSE Research Online: November 2017 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. The deep, historical-roots of Cuban anti-imperialism Ernesto Domínguez López and Helen Yaffe Colonialism, imperialism and anti-imperialism have been decisive in shaping Cuban history for hundreds of years. Spain took possession of Cuba as a colony in 1492. For Cubans, building an independent nation and mapping out a development path have been fundamental goals that could only be achieved through a national project that includes coping with the problem of dependence-independence. The presence and vested interests of European colonial powers and the emergence of the United States as a regional and global power marked a sequence of domination, resistance, revolution and conflict. The revolution of 1959 marked a rupture. The advent of a revolutionary and socialist Cuba in the international system impacted many other processes and projects, and unleashed forces opposed to social transformation and national sovereignty for peripheral nations. To study its history is to study the history of the clash between hegemonic powers and the national projects in the Third World. (Anti)imperialism remains a central issue since the restoration of diplomatic relations with the United States in 2015. The Cuban government has declared that ‘normalisation’ between the Cuba and the United States is impossible without the cessation of the US blockade, the end of the US occupation of Guantanamo Bay and termination of regime change programmes including attempts to foment an internal opposition. The issue of imperialism remains key today, in the post-Fidel, President Trump era. This article offers a synthesis of the roots and tenets of Cuban anti-imperialism, which is vital for understanding the most recent events in Cuba-US relations and Cuba’s foreign policy. The instruments provided by history, political science and political economy contribute to a deeper understanding of those complex processes. Some starting points The discussion about Cuban anti-imperialism should be based on two pillars. First, an operative definition of the concept itself. Put briefly, it means a coherent and conscious opposition to 1 imperialism in general and in its specific forms. Therefore, it is dependent of a second concept: imperialism. Lenin’s definition of imperialism describes the core features thus: (1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves, and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed.1 An extensive discussion and any revisions of this definition is beyond the scope of this article. Here, imperialism is defined as the structural domination of peripheral countries and regions by core powers through different means. Hence, anti-imperialism encompasses projects, actions and policies oriented to revert domination and to build a ‘balanced’ relationship between countries and regions based on the promotion of sovereignty. The second pillar is history. The building of colonial empires in the Americas was crucial to the formation of the Atlantic system. The Americas was a key site for the rivalries between European powers fighting for the hegemony and the control of global trade networks.2 The Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Basin, in particular, were the centre of multiple conflicts among old and new powers and multiple interests.3 Thus, the formation and evolution of the Cuban nation have been conditioned by two main features. First, the open, or dependent, character of its economy; Cuba’s evolution was partly shaped by the type and intensity of its insertion into economic networks connecting the different components of the modern World-System.4 Second, the geopolitical value of Cuba’s location. Particularly from a military and economic perspective, Cuba occupies a key geostrategic position. 2 For US elites, control of Cuba was within the goals of their national project. Foundational documents of US foreign policy, such as the Monroe Doctrine or Manifest Destiny, reveal two essential corollaries: first, US elites asserted the importance of securing a base in the region; second, in many ways what is today known as Latin America was not considered ‘external’ to the country. The United States’ aspiration meant that Cuba was, by merit of its geostrategic position and economic potential, a clear and important target for control. This was considered both a necessity for the survival of the American Republic and a right stemming from nature, politics and predestination.5 Interest in controlling Cuba was reinforced by the existence of a sugar industry that by the 1820s had surpassed all competitors.6 In parallel, the United States became Cuba’s fundamental trade partner. A network of US companies were formed to operate with and on the island. Thousands of US citizens established residence in Cuba as investors, traders and corporate representatives, increasingly influencing the island’s economy and augmenting Cuba’s importance for US elites.7 Finally, capital accumulated in the United States sought profitable sources for investment. Meanwhile the destruction of property and commerce during the Cuban Independence Wars (1868-1878; 1879-1880; and 1895-1898), and the embargo ordered in 1869 by the Spanish government for any person associated with the independence struggle, opened space for increasing US ownership in Cuba’s economy.8 Hence, the economic relationship between Cuba and the United States was determined by the logic of the expansion of US corporate capitalism, or emerging imperialism, and the subordination of Cuban industries to its interests. Absorbing Cuban estates and factories at an increasing rate was part of the expansion of the vertical integration of productive processes under corporate management, a trade mark of US capitalism and a major factor in its transition to a hegemonic position.9 From the geopolitical perspective, Cuba was in a key location to serve as a base to protect New Orleans and Florida, and to control Central America and the interoceanic communication vital for the US economy.10 Building a power structure in the region was a necessary step in the process of transforming the United States into the centre of the World- System.11 Thus US strategic imperatives were to wrestle control of Cuba from Spain and stop other European powers from establishing control of the island. The war with Spain and the 3 occupation of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and a few Pacific islands were the immediate outcomes of that perspective.12 The context of Cuban independence was the broad transformation of trans-Atlantic relations via independence revolutions, the collapse of imperial powers, state formation and the emergence of the United States.13 The independence wars of 1868-1898 were largely the outcome of the shortcomings of Spanish colonial rule, the accumulation of economic and social crises and the rise of independentismo as the hegemonic core of Cuban political ideologies; driving an emergent national project to the goal of building a sovereign country.14 In 1898, when Spain was losing control of Cuba to the independence fighters, the United States’ intervened, effectively preventing the triumph of a social revolution. The US managed the construction of a Cuban Republic in which traditional elites, threatened by the radicalism of the intended independence, maintained a privileged position.15 The Cuban oligarchy was willingly incorporated as a subordinated component in a US-centred power structure, becoming in the process a key tool in producing and reproducing US hegemony. The Republic of 1902 was shaped by mechanisms created to secure US domination over Cuba, clearly embedded in the Platt Amendment. This provided the legal framework for the new polity in its relationship with United States, and essentially put control of Cuban foreign policy and domestic politics legally in US hands.16 It also created the framework for the establishment of US naval stations in Cuba.17 Domination over the Cuban economy was reinforced through the Trade Reciprocity Treaty of 1904, which granted Cuban agricultural products exported to the United States a 20% tariff discount. In exchange, a long list of US goods received up to 40% tariff discount in Cuba.18 In 1895, the total value of US investments in Cuba was estimated at $95 million.19 By the 1920s, US companies produced two-thirds of Cuba’s sugar.